The main legal point established in the judgment is the right of a litigant to withdraw litigation, including the appeal and the original proceeding, and the effect of withdrawal of sanction on the appeal.

JUDGMENT :

This intra-court appeal seeks to call in question a learned Single Judge’s order dated 20.04.2023 whereby Appellant’s W.P.No.10479/2020 (GM-RES) challenging the Sanction Order dated 25.09.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent herein for CBI investigation has been negatived.

2. After service of notice, Respondent Nos.1 & 2 have entered appearance through the learned Additional Government Advocate; the 3rd Respondent CBI is represented by Senior Panel Counsel Sri P.Prasanna Kumar. In view of the request made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Appellant’s Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9097/2023 disposed off on 10.11.2023, this matter on being mentioned, has been listed today for the time-bound disposal. The same reads as under:

“Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The impugned order being interim in nature, we are not inclined to interfere with the same, more, particularly when the petitioner – CBI has already filed an application for vacation of the stay granted in the impugned order passed by the High Court, before the High Court.

However, it is requested that the High Court may hear and dispose of the application filed by the CBI seeking vacation of stay and the appeal pending before it as expeditiously as possible and preferably within two weeks.

The special leave petition stands disposed of accordingly.

All pending applications are disposed of.”

3. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Kapil Sibal and learned Advocate General Mr.Shashi Kiran Shetty, both appearing for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 have filed a Memo dated 29.11.2023 along with a copy of the Government Order No.HD4COD 2023, Bengaluru, dated 28.11.2023. This short Memo has the following text:

“The Respondent prays leave of this Court to produce copy of the Government Order dated 28.11.2023 vide GO No.HD4COD 2023, withdrawing the consent given under Section 6 of the Delhi Special police Establishment Act, 1946. Wherefore, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to take the same on record, in the interests of justice and equity.”

The conclusive portion of the Government Order dated 29.11.2023 reads as under:

“Thus, in view of the aforesaid circumstances, the Government of Karnataka hereby withdraws the Government Order No.E-HD/40/COD/2019 dated 25.09.2019.”

Mr. Sibal & Mr.Shetty submit that by the above Government order, the State Government has withdrawn its earlier Order No.E-HD/40/COD/2019 dated 25.09.2019 whereby sanction/consent was accorded u/s 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 for the CBI inquiry/investigation against the Appellant herein.

4. Learned Senior Advocates Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mr. Udaya Holla both appearing for the Appellant have also moved a tiny Memo dated 29.11.2023 which reads as under:

“In the Light of the Government Order dated 28.11.2023, prayer in the writ petition has been rendered infructuous and hence the Writ Petition and Writ Appeal may be permitted to be withdrawn.”

It bears name & signature of learned counsel on record appearing for the Appellant. Dr.Singhvi & Mr.Holla submit that both the Writ Appeal and Writ Petition be permitted to be withdrawn in view of the recent development in the matter i.e., the Government Order dated 28.11.2023 whereby the sanction/consent for CBI inquiry/investigation accorded earlier, has now been withdrawn and as a logical consequence thereof, the said inquiry/investigation stands interdicted.

5. Learned Senior Panel Counsel Sri P. Prasanna Kumar appearing for the Respondent–CBI and the learned advocate Sri Venkatesh P. Dalwai appearing for the Intervener vide I.A.No.3/2023 vehemently submit that the Government Order dated 28.11.2023 which recalls the grant of sanction for CBI inquiry/investigation, is not only contrary to law but absolutely incompetent and ‘non est’ and therefore it cannot be acted upon. They hasten to add that pursuant to Sanction Order dated 25.09.2019, a FIR having been registered against the Appellant, the investigation is more than half way through. They